In the absence of the Dean of Hereford, the Very Reverend Peter Haynes led the Council in prayer.  The Council observed a period of silence in memory of the late Gordon Morris, a former Councillor, who had died a few days before.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors B.F. Ashton, Mrs. E.M. Bew, N.J.J. Davies, K.G. Grumbley, J.G.S. Guthrie, P.E. Harling, J.W. Hope, J.C. Mayson, Mrs. J.E. Pemberton, Miss F. Short, J.P. Thomas and P.G. Turpin.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on this Agenda.

Councillor Mrs. A.E. Gray and Councillor R.M. Wilson both declared a personal interest in Agenda Item 9 Cabinet Report to Council, paragraph 12.1(i) Future Social Care Needs for Older People and Adults with Learning Disabilities in Herefordshire.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 3rd November, 2006.

The Chairman drew Council's attention to an error in the Members Allowances Scheme which had been approved at the previous meeting.  The amount payable to Group Leaders for each member of their Group should have read £124 and not £120.45.  

RESOLVED:  That, with that amendment, the minutes of the meeting held on 3rd November, 2006 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive the Chairman's announcements and petitions from members of the public.

The Chairman congratulated the Electoral Registration Team and the Local Land Charges Team for retaining their joint accreditation for ISO 9001:2000 which is a Quality Management System on their operating procedures.

He reminded Council that the Civic Service would take place on Sunday, 11th March at 3.30 at Bridstow Church and urged those who had not responded to their invitations to do so, so that final arrangement could be made in good time.

He announced that a memorial service would be held for the former Councillor, Gordon Morris, at Eyton Church on 15th February at 2.00 pm.

With elections due in May, he reminded Council of the Code of Conduct on Local Publicity which restricts communications during the run-up to elections from 27th March until 3rd May, inclusive.  Detailed guidance prepared by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and approved by the Standards Committee, had been circulated to Councillors.

Finally, he  reminded Members that the Council meeting on 9th March was primarily to approve the budget and Council Tax for 2007/08 and that there was no provision in the Council's Constitution for Councillors to submit formal written questions.  Members would only be allowed to ask questions based on the reports in the agenda.

To receive questions from members of the public.

Under the Constitution a member of the public can ask a Cabinet Member or Chairman of a Committee any question relevant to a matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties, or which affects the County, as long as a copy of the question is deposited with the Head of Legal and Democratic Services more than six clear working days before the meeting.  A number of questions had been received and were set out in the agenda.  A question from Revd. P. Hackett had been omitted from the agenda in error but had been circulated to all Members earlier in the week and also circulated at the beginning of the meeting .

The majority of the questions related to the Unitary Development Plan, housing at Bullinghope and the Rotherwas Access Road.  The Chairman ruled that to respond to all the questions individually would take longer than the time allocated within the Constitution.  It would also involve considerable duplication because a number of questions covered similar ground.  He advised that detailed written answers would be sent to the individuals concerned and called on the Leader to give a composite response to the questions posed by Mr. and Mrs. Cocks, Mr. Jardin, Mr. Caldicutt, Mr. and Mrs. Shuttlewood, Ms Shuttlewood and the Revd. Hackett.  The Leader's response is set out below:

The proposal to allocate land at Bullinghope for 300 dwellings has been fully considered through the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) process.  Many matters were raised in representations to the draft Plan and were addressed by the Inspector in his Report.  Although the Council has rejected the Inspector’s recommendation in this case, no new matters have been raised in subsequent representations which would require a second Inquiry.

The Council’s reasons for rejecting the Inspector’s recommendation are set out in the published Statement of Decisions and Reasons referring to the role of the site in helping to ensure that the strategic housing requirement is met and the opportunity to secure financial contributions for the proposed Rotherwas Futures Project which includes the Rotherwas Access Road.

Housing requirements for the County are set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy.  The Bullinghope site will help ensure that these regional requirements are met and the Regional Assembly has concluded that the UDP is in general conformity with the Regional Spatial Strategy.  Changes to household projections at national level feed initially into the process of reviewing the Regional Spatial Strategy, rather than directly to the Council.  The Regional Assembly is currently consulting on revisions to the Spatial Strategy which incorporate revised housing requirements for the County.

The Council recognises the strategic importance of delivering the Rotherwas Access Road.  The proposed housing site of Bullinghope will provide some funding to assist in its delivery.  It is anticipated that the site will yield approximately 300 dwellings with no affordable housing being provided.

Having reviewed the Transport Assessment submitted by Bloors for the UDP Inquiry it is estimated that there will be under 500 vehicles per day using  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

Before the Chairman could move on to the next item, a member of the public, representing a group objecting to the proposed housing development at Bullinghope, asked the Chairman if he would suspend Standing Orders and allow him to speak.  The Chairman ruled that he was not prepared to suspend Standing Orders.

Councillor Mrs. M.D. Lloyd-Hayes asked if one of the group would be allowed to speak on behalf of the group. 

Councillor W.J.S. Thomas, as local member, said that people had a real and proper interest in this matter and had attended the Council meeting in adverse weather conditions to make their views known.  However, he felt that it would be better to discuss the issues once a proposal had been received from the developer.  He felt it would be more meaningful to have a full consultation programme at this stage when the Council would be in a position to explain ongoing problems and challenges and also the benefits of the scheme. 

The Chief Executive reminded Councillors that the Chairman had properly ruled within the Constitution and that Council should respect the Chairman's ruling.

Councillor A.C.R. Chappell asked if the Leader would be willing to meet the group immediately after the meeting to explain the answer he had given to their questions.

The Chairman agreed that this would be in order and moved to the next item of business.  The spokesman of the group carried on speaking and the Chairman adjourned the meeting until order could be restored.

The meeting adjourned at 10.56 a.m.

The meeting reconvened at 12.07 p.m.  The public were readmitted and all the Councillors present at the commencement of the meeting returned except Councillors Mrs. C.J. Davis and Mrs. J.P. French who left because of the poor weather.

The Chairman explained that as the bad weather was continuing he had received a number of expressions of concern about the meeting continuing.  He shared those concerns but was anxious to ensure that any essential business be completed.  The Chairman asked the Chief Executive for advice on how that might best be achieved.

The Chief Executive explained that there was provision in the Constitution to deal with Questions to Cabinet Members by way of written answers and that it was open to Council to adopt that position and then to complete the essential business of Council with the Cabinet Report, the report of the Standards Committee and the item requesting leave of absence for Councillor Turpin, before checking what further elements of the Council's business could be completed on the day.

Council agreed to proceed on that basis.

To receive any written questions.

Councillors may ask questions of Cabinet Members and Chairmen of Committees so long as a copy of the question is deposited with the Head of Legal and Democratic Services at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.  A list of questions, set out in the order in which they had been received, was circulated at the beginning of the meeting.

The Chairman advised that those Councillors who had submitted written questions would receive written answers.  For completeness the questions and answers are reproduced below.

Question from Councillor H. Bramer

The Cabinet Member will be aware that Stagecoach Service 33 between Ross on Wye and Gloucester is a life line for work, school, health care, shopping, and travel outside the county and is vital to many hundreds of residents that live along or near the A40. Can the cabinet member please confirm that now that Stagecoach have given notice that they intend to withdraw the service from 22nd April, Herefordshire Council will provide subsidy to maintain the service 33 at its present level ?

Answer from Councillor D.B. Wilcox, Cabinet Member (Highways and Transportation)

I can confirm that notice has been received from Stagecoach that the company intends to withdraw bus service No. 33 as from 22 April 2007 as the current level of patronage can no longer sustain commercial operation. The Director of Environment is investigating the demand for a bus service in the area affected and is seeking tenders for a subsidised replacement service that best meets the needs of local residents. Priority will be given to ensuring that journeys to work and school can still be made and a service will continue to operate throughout the day to cater for shopping, health care and longer-distance journeys.

The need to replace this previously unsubsidised service will place additional pressure on the Council's public transport budget and it is therefore essential that the level of service provided can be justified by the use made of it. A significant proportion of the service operates in Gloucestershire and that authority's views and possible level of contribution towards costs will have to be taken into account. The Director of Environment will therefore seek to award a contract at a service level that represents the best value for public money commensurate with the demand for the service and available resources.

Councillor Bramer may also wish to be aware that, on the 29th January, with the problems involving communities such as those affected by the withdrawal of the no. 33 service, I raised the matter direct with the Secretary of State for Transport. He said that he was reviewing his subsidies generally so I asked him if he would give an undertaking to pay particular regard to rural communities in remote areas.  He replied saying he was very much aware of the essential role that public transport played in such areas and would take proper account of the issue during the review, whilst bearing in mind the need for value for money.

Question from Councillor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

To consider any Notices of Motion.

There were no Notices of Motion.

To receive the report and to consider any recommendations to Council arising from the meetings held on 16th November, 14th and 21st December, 2006 and 18th January, 2007.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor R.J. Phillips, presented the report of the meetings of Cabinet held on 16th November, 14th and 21 December, 2006 and 18th January, 2007.

In relation to Item 1.1 Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan (UDP) - In response to a number of questions about councillors ability to vote on planning issues, having already voted on the UDP, the Chief Executive advised that the two issues involved separate processes.  The UDP was an overall plan to decide what development should or should not be permitted; the planning process would address individual planning applications within the context of the UDP.  Even though Councillors had voted on the UDP they would still be able to vote on the detailed planning applications.

A number of Members voiced concerns about the proposed housing development at Bullinghope, in particular: the lack of additional infrastructure to support the proposed number of houses; the eventual sell-out price of the housing and the absence of affordable housing; that the number of houses eventually built on the site could be up to 2,000; increase in traffic on the Ross Road and Belmont roundabout; alternative options for funding the Rotherwas Access Road.

The Leader reminded Council, that although there were no plans for affordable housing on this particular site, he had been the one who had proposed a recommendation to amend the UDP to increase the amount of affordable housing to 40%.  He said that the affordability of homes was a national problem that needed to be addressed by central government and that the Council needed to contribute to those discussions. 

He stated that the Council should secure appropriate contributions from the developers by way of Section 106 agreements.  Too often in the past the Council had granted permission for large housing schemes but had not secured as much as it should to support the additional public infrastructure required.  He said there would never be enough public money for Herefordshire to solve its transport issues and so the Council needed to maximise its income in the best way possible.

He acknowledged that Herefordshire had a low wage economy and high housing costs but said the county needed to attract better paid jobs.  It was important that the 2,000 jobs at Rotherwas be protected and the Council needed to do what it could to support existing businesses as well as attract new ones.  He spoke of the redevelopment of the Edgar Street Grid, but said that in order to maintain the economic viability, of Herefordshire, the Council would also have to look at development of sites other than brownfield sites.  All future developments in the County would need to take account of and reduce the impact of climate change and travel.

He said that Herefordshire was not a big part of central government's agenda and would need to look after itself.  If it failed people would have neither houses nor jobs.  He finished by saying he felt that adopting the UDP was the best option for the County.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

The majority of the public left the meeting at this point.

The Chief Executive advised that, as the Cabinet Report had been dealt with fairly briskly it might be possible for Council to consider all the other items on the agenda and this was agreed.

To receive the report and to consider any recommendations to Council arising from the meetings held on 30th October and 24th November, 2006 and 19th January, 2007.

Councillor T.W. Hunt presented the report of the meetings of the Planning Committee held on 30th October, 24th November, 2006 and 19th January, 2007.

RESOLVED:That the report of the meetings of the Planning Committee held on 30th October, 24th November, 2006 and 19th January, 2007 be received.

To receive the report and to consider any recommendations to Council arising from the meetings held on 31st October and 28th November, 2006 and 30th January, 2007.

Councillor R.I. Mathews presented the report of the meetings of the Regulatory Committee held on 31st October and 28th November, 2006 and 30th January, 2007.

RESOLVED:That the report of the meetings of the Regulatory Committee held on 31st October and 28th November, 2006 and 30th January, 2007 be received.

To receive the report and to consider any recommendations to Council arising from the meetings held on 8th December, 2006 and 19th January, 2007.

Councillor A.C.R. Chappell presented the report of the meetings of the Audit and Corporate Governance Committee held on 8th December, 2006 and 19th January, 2007.

RESOLVED:That the report of the meetings of the Audit and Corporate Governance Committee held on 8th December, 2006 and 19th January, 2007 be received.

To receive the report and to consider any recommendations to Council arising from the meetings held on 22nd December, 2006 and 15th January, 2007.

Councillor T.M. James presented the report of the meetings of the Strategic Monitoring Committee held on 22nd December, 2006 and 15th January, 2007.

RESOLVED:That the report of the meetings of the Strategic Monitoring Committee held on 22nd December, 2006 and 15th January, 2007 be received.

To receive the report and to consider any recommendations to Council arising from the meeting held on 12th January, 2007.

Mr. Robert Rogers presented the report of the meeting of the Standards Committee held on 12th January, 2007.  He reminded Members to be punctilious about the Code of Conduct and asked them to give a lot of thought to matters before resorting to the Standards Board referral procedure.

In response to a request that contentious planning applications be deferred until after the elections, he said that it was not for him to comment.

RESOLVED:That the report of the meeting of the Standards Committee held on 12th January, 2007 be received.

To consider granting Councillor P.G. Turpin leave of absence until May 2007 because of ill health.

RESOLVED:That leave of absence be granted to Councillor P.G. Turpin until he would have ordinarily retired in May, 2007.

To receive the report of the meeting of the West Mercia Police Authority held on 19th December, 2006.  Councillor B. Hunt has been nominated for the purpose of answering questions on the discharge of the functions of the Police Authority.

Councillor B. Hunt presented the report of the meeting of the West Mercia Police Authority held on 19th December, 2006.

Councillor T.M. James advised that the police donated a large jar of lollipops to each licensed premises in an attempt to reduce disorder.  He wanted to know who had advised on this and how much it cost.

In response to a query, Councillor Hunt advised that, despite ongoing financial constraints, the authority intended to be ranked as one of the best performing authorities in the country.

In response to a comment by Councillor Hunt, that the police had only taken 24 minutes to respond to the Council's request for assistance earlier in the day, Councillor W.J.S. Thomas suggested that the Council should consider holding all its Council meetings at the Shire Hall where the response times would be even quicker and where the surroundings were more conducive to meetings of this type.

Councillor Hunt was unable to reassure Council that the number of Community Safety Officers would be maintained.  He said the matter was still under discussion and the position would be clearer in a few weeks.

Councillor Mrs. Lloyd-Hayes asked for congratulations to be passed on to the Community Safety Officers who had recently attended a residents meeting.  She continued to be concerned about the lack of facilities for young people.

RESOLVED:That the report of the meeting of the West Mercia Police Authority held on 19th December, 2006 be received.

To receive the report of the meetings of the Hereford & Worcester Fire and Rescue Authority held on 14th December, 2006.

Councillor G.W. Davies presented the report of the meeting of the Hereford & Worcester Fire and Rescue Authority which was held on 14th December, 2006.

RESOLVED:That the report of the meeting of the Hereford & Worcester Fire and Rescue Authority which was held on 14th December, 2006 be received.